During the Senate debate on the new U.S.-Russian Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New
START) in 2010, many Senators raised questions about Russian nonstrategic nuclear weapons
and noted their absence from the treaty limits. The United States and Russia have not included
limits on these weapons in past arms control agreements. Nevertheless, Congress may press the
Administration to seek solutions to the potential risks presented by these weapons in the future.
During the Cold War, the United States and Soviet Union both deployed nonstrategic nuclear
weapons for use in the field during a conflict. While there are several possible ways to distinguish
between strategic and nonstrategic nuclear weapons, most analysts consider nonstrategic weapons
to be shorter-range delivery systems with lower yield warheads that the United States and Soviet
Union/Russia might use to attack troops or facilities on the battlefield. They have included
nuclear mines; artillery; short-, medium-, and long-range ballistic missiles; cruise missiles; and
gravity bombs. In contrast with the longer-range “strategic” nuclear weapons, these weapons had
a lower profile in policy debates and arms control negotiations, possibly because they did not
pose a direct threat to the continental United States. At the end of the 1980s, each nation still had
thousands of these weapons deployed with their troops in the field, aboard naval vessels, and on
aircraft.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL32572.pdf
START) in 2010, many Senators raised questions about Russian nonstrategic nuclear weapons
and noted their absence from the treaty limits. The United States and Russia have not included
limits on these weapons in past arms control agreements. Nevertheless, Congress may press the
Administration to seek solutions to the potential risks presented by these weapons in the future.
During the Cold War, the United States and Soviet Union both deployed nonstrategic nuclear
weapons for use in the field during a conflict. While there are several possible ways to distinguish
between strategic and nonstrategic nuclear weapons, most analysts consider nonstrategic weapons
to be shorter-range delivery systems with lower yield warheads that the United States and Soviet
Union/Russia might use to attack troops or facilities on the battlefield. They have included
nuclear mines; artillery; short-, medium-, and long-range ballistic missiles; cruise missiles; and
gravity bombs. In contrast with the longer-range “strategic” nuclear weapons, these weapons had
a lower profile in policy debates and arms control negotiations, possibly because they did not
pose a direct threat to the continental United States. At the end of the 1980s, each nation still had
thousands of these weapons deployed with their troops in the field, aboard naval vessels, and on
aircraft.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL32572.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment